Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org>
> MJ Ray wrote:
> > It's the comment system which is incapable, not the people.
> > IMO there was no good reason to design some people out of it.
>
> If it's possible to provide the same level of function with an interface
> that works in more browsers, great - and I believe they did do that as
> time went on, as it now works in Konqueror and IE. But the GPL v3
> commenting interface is, in my view, an exceptional piece of UI design
> and the best way I have ever seen of managing that number of comments on
> a document in a single interface.
Well, that's just great for the users who can see the UI without it
spewing errors. Was there really no way to offer the same features to
everyone in an easily-accessible way? It's really hard to tell from the
ball of spaghetti that was released, but it was based on RT somehow:
so it started off accessible and then users were locked out.
> Given that free software browsers which work with it are available for
> almost every current OS under the sun, to reduce the function to further
> widen the browser choice would have been a bad tradeoff.
There are free software browsers with which it doesn't work, even though
they follow the usual web standards. Should it be the place of FSF
consultations to discriminate between free software by using non-standard
features of some of them? It's a big step backwards from any-browser
(which was claimed on the gplv3 site at first, but later removed, rather
than bringing the software into line).
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct